REPORT OF SELf-STUDY The Divinity School Duke University December, 1983 Archives! 207-756 C187 I R425 1985 DUKE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY REPORT OF SELF- STUDY The Divinity School Duke University Dennis M. Campbell Dean of the Divinity School December, 1983 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 http://archive.org/details/reportofselfstudOOcamp REPORT OF SELF-STUDY The Divinity School Duke University CI87 Introduction I. Methodology 1 II. Governance 2 III. Administration 6 IV. Finance 12 V. Faculty 23 VI. Library 27 VII. Admissions VIII. Curriculum - • IX. Continuing Education X. Student Characteristics and Enrollment Trends '^7 XI. Student Services - XII. Physical Facilities 58 XIII. Alumni ..... XIV. Conclusions and Implications Appendices : The Student Self-Study Report 71 Characteristics of the Divinity School Student Body 84 INTRODUCTION This Self-Study Report comes at an opportune time for the Divinity School of Duke University. Our last Association of Theological Schools Self- Study was completed in 1969. Events in the life of the Divinity School caused delay beyond the normal ten-year expectation. Now we are poised at the beginning of a new period in our history, and this Self-Study serves as a valuable document. It is fully descriptive of our current situation as a School. As such, it offers us an occasion to reflect upon our present state and what our future ought to be. It shows us our strengths and it demonstrates areas of need. It will help us set our priorities and establish our agenda. This Report is the work of two Deans, the entire faculty, the administrative officers, and representative students. Special thanks go to Robert L. Wilson who organized much of the material and wrote most of the document. I trust we will use this Report effectively. Dennis M. Campbell Dean of the Divinity School December, 1983 I METHODOLOGY There were three major components to the Self-Study. The first was the study done by the faculty. During the academic year 1981-82, the faculty was divided into five study groups. These were: (1) Degree programs (2) Curriculum (3) Faculty (4) Student Body (5) Governance Each group made a study of its area of concern and prepared a paper which was circulated among the faculty. The entire faculty met from time to time to review the work, done by the subgroups. A day-long faculty retreat at the beginning of the Fall Semester, 1982 was devoted to formulating conclusions for the final report. The second component was a study made by a student committee which addressed the same issues as the faculty. A report was prepared and circulated to members of the faculty. The third component was a review of alumni opinions. A questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 8% of the graduates to secure their evaluation and perception of the Divinity School. This Report is based on data provided by faculty, students and alumni. -1- II GOVERNANCE The Divinity School is one of six graduate professional schools of Duke University (the others are Law, Medicine, Forestry and Environmental Studies, Nursing, and Business). The other constituent schools of the University are Trinity College of Arts and Sciences, the Graduate School and the Engineering School. By history and Indenture, Duke University stands within the Christian tradition and the Divinity School is one of the thirteen theological schools of The United Methodist Church. As one of the University's professional schools, the Divinity School operates under the University Bylaws and is governed by the Board of Trustees which must approve all matters of finance and which, upon recommendation of the President of the University, appoints the Dean. The Board of Trustees, upon recommendation of the Dean, the Provost, and the President, grants tenured appointments to the faculty and promotions above the rank of assistant professor. The Provost of the University, through the designation of the President, has direct oversight of the professional schools. The Dean of the Divinity School works closely with the Provost: on matters of budget, faculty appointment and promotion, and all matters pertaining to academic program. The Dean of the Divinity School is the chief executive and academic officer and is responsible to the President and the Board of Trustees for all matters of the Divinity School's institutional well-being. These include; budget and finance; institutional and financial development; academic program; appointment. -2- 3 promotion, tenure, continuation, and termination of faculty; appointment and supervision of administrative officers; relationship with The United Methodist Church; relationships with other support constituencies; alumni and external affairs; and formal and informal relationships within Duke University. The Dean is responsible for the official relationship of the Divinity School to the general University. Budget is determined by regular University procedures, faculty appointments and promotions are processed through University committees and officers, and degree programs are approved by the Academic Council of the University. Internal arrangements, as long as they conform to the prescriptions of University regulations and policies, are determined by the Divinity School Itself, under the direction of the Dean and by agreed-upon procedures within the School. The faculty of the Divinity School is organized to carry on its responsibil- ities for the educational program of the School. The guidelines by which the faculty is currently organized were formulated in 1968 and adopted in January of 1969. The faculty determines admissions policies and procedures, the curriculum, degree requirements, graduation eligibility, and is involved with the Dean in matters concerning appointment, promotion, tenure, continuation and termination of faculty members. (Organizational Structure of the Divinity School, January 28, 1969. See also Chapter II of Duke University Faculty Handbook , pp. II-2 and II-3.) In preparation of the Self-Study Document, the committees on governance and administrative organization urged modification of the organizational pattern which was adopted in 1969. At a regular meeting of the faculty on May A, 1983, it was recommended that revision of faculty organization be proposed for faculty action at the beginning of the Fall Semester, 1983. A group of faculty members 4 are at work on a revision designed to simplify organization according to specific suggestions made by two committees on governance and organization and by the faculty, as a whole, at the 1982 Faculty Retreat. Recommendations Included simplifying structures to reduce the amount of time spent in meetings, the establishment of a curriculum committee, in order that the faculty as a whole could again exercise its proper responsibility for the curriculum, and the establishment of a standing Committee on Faculty Planning and Appointment. The latter proposal was urged with reference to the fact that large vision and careful planning is necessary in coming years when many new faculty will be needed as a result of mandatory retirements. The Dean's Advisory Council was a group of persons from outside the Divinity School advisory to the Dean on all matters pertaining to the institutional well- being of the School. In the Fall of 1983, the Advisory Council was transformed by Dean Campbell and President Sanford into a Board of Visitors, conforming to the guidelines of the Board of Trustees of Duke University. The proposed structure of the Board of Visitors follows: STRUCTURE OF THE BOARD OF VISITORS The Divinity School Duke University (1) Purpose . The Purpose of the Board of Visitors of the Divinity School of Duke University shall be to advise and support the Dean and the Divinity School. This advice will be especially important in relationship to the church, to the University, and to potential supporters of the School. The Board will advise the Dean in matters concerning all aspects of the Divinity School's life. (2) From Dean ' s Advisory Council to Board of Visitors. The Dean's Advisory Council of the Divinity School of Duke University will become a Board of Visitors by action of the Board of Trustees of Duke University. All current members of the Dean's Advisory Council will be invited to become members of the Board of Visitors. Names of current members will be placed on slips of paper and drawn to be assigned to initial classes as called for in the documents of establishment of the Board of Visitors. 5 (3) Membership of the Board . The Board of Visitors will include twenty-four persons. In addition, the Dean of the Divinity School shall be a member ex officio . Included in the membership of the Board of Visitors shall be at least one member of the Board of Trustees of Duke University, some alu0mi of the Divinity School, some lay persons from The United Methodist Church, and at least one faculty member from another theological school. (4) Procedures for Appointment . Appointment to the Board of Visitors of the Divinity School will be made by the President of Duke University upon the advice of the Dean of the Divinity School. The Dean of the Divinity School will submit to the President of the University recommended appointees and letters of appointment will be issued by the President. (5) Terms of Office . Persons will be appointed to the Board of Visitors for an initial term of three years. It will be possible for a member of the Board to serve for a second three-year term. Normally, persons will be expected to serve for six years. No member of the Board may serve for more than six years without at least one year off the Board. (6) C lasses . There will be three classes of membership in the Board of Visitors. Each class will include eight members of the Board. (7) Meetings . There will be two meetings of the Board of Visitors each year. One meeting will take place in the Fall Semester; one will take place in the Spring Semester. (8) Officers . There shall be a Chairman and a Vice Chairman of the Board of Visitors elected annually by the Board. The Dean will designate a member of the staff of the Divinity School to serve as Secretary. The Secretary will not be a member of the Board. The Dean will serve as chairman of a nominating committee of Board members to recommend officers. They shall be elected annually. (9) Relationship to the University Board of Trustees and Central University Administration . The Board of Visitors of the Divinity School will annually report to the Committee on Academic Affairs of the Board of Trustees of the University. Occasionally, the Chairman of the Board of Visitors may be invited to report to the Board of Trustees of the University, Ill ADMINISTRATION The administrative organization of the Divinity School currently Includes nine officers. Their leadership style is characterized by strong commitment to the Divinity School and to close coordination, cooperation, teamwork, and collegiality. The officers, as of September 1, 1983, with the date of their Initial appointment, and their primary areas of responsibility, are as follows: (1) Dean. Dennis M. Campbell, A.B., Duke University; B.D., Yale University; Ph.D., Duke University. Dean of the Divinity School and Professor of Theology. (1979; appointed Dean December 1, 1982). The Dean is the chief executive, academic, and financial officer. He has general administrative responsibility for all aspects of the Divinity School. With the increasing size of Duke University, and the growing expectation that each constituent school must assume responsibility for its own total life, the deanship has become more complex. While at one time many aspects of the Divinity School's life were cared for by other officers of Duke University, now the Divinity School must care for these needs, and bear the attendant costs. An example of this is alumni affairs; others are development, communications, and personnel records. The Dean must give general oversight to the entirety of the Divinity School life and program, including faculty development and curriculum, degree programs, continuing education, recruitment and admission of students, financial and institutional development, budget, personnel administration, external -6- 7 relationships, and community life. The Dean Is responsible, along with the chairman of the Department of Religion, for the Graduate Program in Religion. The Dean also has teaching responsibilities. The Dean must serve four primary constituencies, namely (1) the faculty and students of the Divinity School, (2) the Trustees, administration and faculty of Duke University, (3) alumni and external supporters, including Trustees of The Duke Endowment and the Divinity School Board of Visitors and (4) The United Methodist Church. None of these can be neglected, as this Self-Study makes clear. Effective relationship with all of these groups is vital to the present state and future shape of the Divinity School. The Dean must be aggressive, sensitive, skilled and tireless in promoting the interests of the Divinity School within the University, the general academic community, the church, and among potential friends. (2) Associate Dean for Curricular Affairs . Robert L. Wilson, A.B., Asbury College; M.A., Lehigh University; B.D., Garrett Theological Seminary; Ph.D., Northwestern University. Associate Dean for Curricular Affairs and Research Professor of Church and Society. (1970; appointed Associate Dean for Curricular Affairs 1980). The Associate Dean for Curricular Affairs is responsible for scheduling courses, coordinating faculty offerings, evaluating transcripts, handling student academic problems, monitoring student academic progress, and supervising the operations of the Registry. The Associate Dean serves part-time in this capacity, though demands are great and the requirements of the job exceed part- time status. (3) Assistant Dean for Field Education and Student Services . B. Maurice Ritchie, A.B., Davidson College; B.D., Duke University; Th.M., Duke University; further graduate study, Duke University Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. (1973). 8 The Assistant Dean for Field Education and Student Services is responsible for all aspects of student affairs. This includes recruitment, admissions, financial aid, and student life. He is also director of the field education program. As such he is an educational officer of the Divinity School since field education is a component of the basic degree programs. The Assistant Dean is responsible for the assignment of students to field placements, supervision of their field experience, and evaluation of their readiness for ministry. The Assistant Dean also consults with judicatory officials in the selection of student pastors and is responsible for their training, supervision and evaluation. The Assistant Dean works closely with bishops, district superintendents, local church committees, boards of ordained ministry and the Rural Church Division of The Duke Endowment. (4) Director of Continuing Education . (Currently not filled) The Director of Continuing Education is responsible for all non-degree educational programs. The Director works closely with the Dean and the Associate Dean for Curricular Affairs and handles many relationships with other schools and programs in the University. The Director works with the church in a consultative role, and with alumni and other persons who seek educational services of the Divinity School. The Director coordinates off-campus educational programs, special institutes, international programs, and Convocation. A great deal of the Director's time is spent in the development of educational programs and in relationship of the Divinity School to external constituencies. (5) Director of Admissions and Student Affairs . Paula Elizabeth Gilbert, B.A., Huntingdon College; M.Div., Duke University. (1980). The Director of Admissions and Student Affairs is responsible for recruitment and admission of students. The Director coordinates all recruitment 9 activities and the work of the Admissions Committee. The Director also works with student financial aid. The Director is a major interpreter of the life and work of the Divinity School to prospect J.ve students, the church constituency, to alumni and to supporters. The Director also is responsible for student life activities. The Director counsels students, works with student organizations, and provides guidance for student concerns. (6) Director of Development and Alumni Affairs . Wesley F, Brown, B.A., Methodist College; M.Div., Duke University. (1981). The Director of Development and Alumni Affairs works closely with the Dean in the management of the Annual Fund, alumni activities, capital gifts, corporate gifts, major gift prospects, telethon, foundation proposals, and relationships with local churches and general church agencies. The Director assists with communications, external affairs, and long-range planning. The Director relates to the Board of Visitors, the Alumni Council, the Dean's Club, and other institutional support groups. The Director is the Divinity School's liaison officer with the University Office of Development and Office of Alumni Affairs. (7) Administrative Assistant for General Administration and Finance. Clara S. Godwin. (1969). The Administrative Assistant for General Administration and Finance works closely with, and reports directly to, the Dean. The responsibilities of this position are varied and include the following: business management of the Divinity School budget; supervision of support staff (intet-viewlng, hiring and evaluation), including student employees; service on the Financial Aid Committee; supervision of maintenance and of physical facilities; purchase of supplies and 10 equipment; allocation of space usage; planning and coordination of official social functions; public relations representative for the Dean's Office. (8) Director of Black Church Affairs .' Grant S. Shockley, A.B., Lincoln University; M.Dlv., Drew University; M.A., Columbia University; Ed.D., Columbia University. Director of Black Church Affairs and Professor of Christian Education. (1983). The Director of Black Church Affairs is responsible for all aspects of the Divinity School's work with the black church. This includes recruitment and admission of students, counseling of students, work with alumni, continuing education for ethnic minority pastors, and relationships with black church leaders and constituencies. The Director is a full member of the faculty of the Divinity School and provides leadership for the general concerns of black church studies. (9) Director of Communications . Christopher Wal ters-Bugbee, B.A., Hamilton College; graduate theological study at the Episcopal Divinity School, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary and Harvard Divinity School. (1983). The Director of Communications prepares brochures and interpretive materials for all Divinity School programs and offices. The Director writes and edits Divinity School publications, including an alumni newsletter, bulletin, catalog, and other appropriate organs. The Director is responsible for all aspects of preparation, production and mailing of materials. The Director works with the church and secular press to communicate the story of Duke Divinity School. Press releases, the generation of publicity, and external perception of the Divinity School are the Director's responsibility. All administrative officers are responsible to the Dean. The demands of the deanshlp have caused some concern about the present administrative 11 organization. As currently structured, the Dean is called upon to give direct leadership to a large staff and many programs. The requirement that the University professional schools provide their ovm services (alumni affairs, developm.ent, communications, personnel) has multiplied the Dean's managerial responsibilities. IV FINAN'CE In the 1983-84 fiscal year, the Divinity School will operate on a budget of $4.2 million. Income Analysis of sources of projected income results in the following picture: Table 1 Sources of Projected Income 1983 - 1984 Student Tuition and Fees 24% Endowment Income 22% United Methodist Church Ministerial Education Fund 20% Gifts and Grants 17% Field Education Grants 15% Annual Fund 1% Churches and Organizations 1% 100% Although the budget of the Divinity School increases each year, over the past five years these percentages have remained essentially the same. Each deserves some comment and explanation: (1) Student Tuition and Fees . No tuition charge was made of Divinity School students until the fiscal year 1964. Since that time tuition charges have been levied; but these charges are considerably less than any of the other professional schools of the University and about half undergraduate tuition -12- 13 charges. Our 1983-84 academic year tuition is $3,820. Table 2 1983-84 Tuitions for other Schools of Duke University* Trinity College $ 6,780 Fuqua School of Business 8,500 School of Law 8,000 School of Medicine 8,500 Divinity School 3,820 ♦Tuition only, does not include fees, housing, food, etc. Table 3 1983-84 Academic Year Tuition at some selected Theological Schools Duke Divinity School $ 3,820 Emory (Candler School of Theology) 4,230 Southern Methodist University (Perkins School of Theology) 4,000 Princeton Theological Seminary 2,500 Southeastern Baptist Theological 500 (Baptists) Seminary 1,000 (Non-Baptists) Vanderbllt Divinity School 4,968 Wesley Theological Seminary 3,450 Yale Divinity School 6,300 The Student Tuition category includes subsidy from The United Methodist Church Ministerial Education Fund since most of our United Methodist students receive grants directly from their annual conferences out of a portion of the M.E.F. retained in the annual conference for support of Its own students. Few of our students pay their full tuition and fees from their own sources. Student tuition and fees provide about 24% of the Divinity School's 14 total income. This percentage is not excessive. The Divinity School is not unduly dependent on tuition. Nevertheless, tuition is important, and our full- time equivalent enrollment figure cannot be allowed to decline. Moreover, a number of our other sources of income are determined, in part, by the number of students in the School. (2) EndovTment Income . The endowment figure (22% of our annual budget) includes income from a number of funds. The Divinity School, as one of the constituent schools of Duke University, receives a portion of the income from the University's endowment pool. This does not include any of the money received from The Duke Endowment, a separate private trust. The Divinity School has a number of endowed funds of its own, as well. These endowed funds are part of the University's permanent or qua si-endowment pool, but are specified for the Divinity School. These include scholarship funds, endowed professorship funds, and certain other funds with stipulated purposes. As of June 1982, the market value of all Divinity School endowments, including annuity trust and unitrust funds totaled $4,533,622. The Divinity School does not have sufficient endowment. We have no fully-funded professorships, for instance (a fully-funded professorship is $750,000). We need more endowed scholarships, and we must have more endowment for general operations and undesignated needs. A major continuing development goal is to increase endowment. (3) United Methodist Church Ministerial Education Fund . The M.E.F. was established by The United Methodist Church in 1970. Former Duke Dean Robert E. Cushman was a leader in the establishment of this Fund. The Fund supports the thirteen United Methodist theological schools. The M.E.F. amounts to 15 approximately 20% of Duke's annual income. We receive a share of the total annual income of the M.E.F. The distribution of the Fund is determined by a complex formula, including M.Div. enrollment, U.M. enrollment, and various "quality" factors. In 1982 the M.E.F. distributed $8,601,450 among the thirteen United Methodist seminaries. Duke received $751,325.75 (8.73% of the total). The M.E.F. works on a calendar fiscal year, while Duke works on a fiscal year running July 1-June 30. In our 1982-83 fiscal year budget the M.E.F. amounted to $800,027.04. The M.E.F. income is accounted for by the University as "Private Gift, Grant and Contract Income." Each month a report is sent to the deans indicating "Private Gift, Grant and Contract Income" for each school in Duke University. Because of the M.E.F., the Divinity School usually ranks third in the University, after the Medical School and Trinity College. The M.E.F. thus greatly enhances our strength in the University because we have strong and stable external support. The importance of the Ministerial Education Fund cannot be over- emphasized. The Dean must work tirelessly, along with the chief executive officers of the other United Methodist seminaries, and executives of the Board of Higher Education and Ministry, to assure the continuation of the Fund and to work toward increasing levels of support. (5) Gifts and Grants . Gift and grant income amounts to 17% of our annual budget. This includes gifts from individuals, usually lay persons deeply committed to the church and its ministry, churches, and some foundation grants. The Duke Endowment makes a number of major grants each year to the Divinity School apart from the field education program. This includes regular grants 16 for continuing education, educational and service projects, and occasional special gifts. Table A Direct Support to the Divinity School from The Duke Endowment* 1982 - 1983 Continuing Education Support (includes gifts and grants) $ 78,149 Field Education Program 25,000 Field Education Grants (includes interns and student pastors) 339,885 Field Education Counseling Fund (for supervisory purposes) 8,000 McCormack Fund Memorial Gift 50,000 $501,034** *The Duke Endowment is a perpetual trust, established by the late James Buchanan Duke by Indenture dated December 11, 1924, The Duke Endowment is entirely separate from Duke University. **This figure is mainly (though not entirely) support directly to the Divinity School through the Rural Church Division (restricted, by Indenture, to service of The United Methodist Church). It does not include the Divinity School's portion of income to Duke University designated in Mr. Duke's Indenture. Analysis of gift and grant income demonstrates the importance of The Duke Endowment and of the Divinity School's traditional ties and church constituency. This category of support must be increased. (6) Field Education Grants . Field Education Grants represent almost 15% of our income. Primarily this money comes from The Duke Endowment through the Rural Church Division. There are a few non-Duke Endovnnent-eligible churches who make grants. 17 The Divinity School is blessed with an unequaled field education program because of the support of The Duke Endowment. The money not only makes possible an outstanding program, but also frees the Divinity School from seeking this money from other sources. Also, this money allows our students (not only United Methodists) to help finance their education. (7) Annual Fund . The Annual Fund figure is an actual figure in the Divinity School budget established in consultation with the University Office of Development and the Provost's Office. We must raise the money one way or another. In the last year, the Annual Fund has made dramatic progress. Better organization, the cultivation of class agents, and sensitive work with the telethon has greatly increased alumni giving. The Divinity School leads Duke University in the percentage of alumni (more than 50% during fiscal 1982-83) who contribute to the Annual Fund. There are 201 alumni who are members of the Dean's Club (gifts of $100 or more per year.) (8) Churches and Organizations . Some churches and organizations make contributions to the Divinity School. In summary , the Divinity School's income figures demonstrate our dependence on student tuition, on The United Methodist Church, The Duke Endowment, and gifts from individuals who have interest in theological education for service to the church. A clear priority is increased support from individual donors, and some development of private foundation gifts. Diversification of support is a goal which must be high among our priorities, though evidence suggests that our constituency is fairly well-defined. 18 Expenditures Analysis of projected expenditures results in the following picture; Table 5 Projected Expenditures 1983 - 1984 Instruction General Operations Student Financial Aid Physical Plant Library 30.35% 29.75% 23.14% 8.56% 8.20% 100.00% (1) Instruction . This figure represents salaries of the full-time regular faculty. Salaries in the Divinity School at Duke are established in relationship to the salaries of all Duke faculties, though a given school's financial strength is a consideration. Duke Divinity School salaries are competitive and it is the commitment of the Dean, the Provost, the President, and the Trustees to provide appropriate compensation for professional services. Average salaries , in rank, for full-time regular faculty are as follows: Table 6 Average Faculty Salaries 1979 - 1984 YEAR 1979- 80 1980- 81 1981- 82 1982- 83 1983- 84 PROFESSOR $ 29,550 32,200 35,230 39,000 41,520 ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR $ 22,600 24,800 28,270 31,300 32,950 ASSISTANT PROFESSOR $ 20,000 22,900 25,190 27,000 28,900 INSTRUCTOR $ 18,000 20,100 22,110 20,000 20,750 19 These are base salaries In the Divinity School. Total compensation, including fringe benefits (retirement, life insurance, disability, etc.), adds a hidden 20.7% to each faculty salary. Thus a salary of $32,950, for instance, yields a total compensation of $39,770, Duke Divinity School participates with the other major theological schools in a comparative salary study based at Harvard University. Table 7 provides the most recent information on salaries at major divinity schools. Duke compares favorably and is ranked second in mean salaries adjusted for regional variation in cost of living. Table 7 Comparative Salary Data for University Divinity Schools 1980-1981 Maximum Minimum Unad- Ad- justed BLS justed Unad- Ad- Unad- Ad- School Mean Rank Index Mean Rank justed justed justed justed Tenured Faculty Yale 32,400 (3) 103^ 31,456 (3) 52,000 50,485 22,000 21,359 Vanderbilt 27,520 (7) 88* 31,273 (4) 38,128 43,327 20,509 23,306 Emory (Candler) 27,665 (6) 91 30,401 (6) 33,000 36,264 22,500 24,725 SMU (Perkins) 27,810 (5) 89 31,247 (5) 34,347 38,592 21,143 23,756 Union (New York) 27,491 (8) 125 21,193 (B) 31,671 25,337 24,194 19,355 Duke 30,564 (A) 95* 32,173 (2) 42,900 45,157 22,400 23,579 Harvard 34,731 (2) 122 28,123 (7) 49,500 40,574 31,700 25,984 Chicago 35,000 (1) 99 35,354 (1) 45,000 45,455 27,000 27,273 Untenured Faculty Yale 23, ,511 (1) 102 22, ,657 (4) 28, ,000 27,451 20, ,000 19,608 Vanderbilt^ Emory (Candler) 23, ,098 (2) 92 25, ,107 (1) 28, ,500 30,978 17, ,500 19,022 SMU (Perkins) 20, ,226 (A) 89 22, ,726 (3) 22, ,732 25,542 18, ,816 21,142 Union (New York) 18, .121 (6) 116 15, ,622 (6) 18, ,381 15,846 17, ,948 15,472 Duke 22, ,900 (3) 97* 23, ,608 (2) 22, ,900 23,608 22, ,900 23,608 Harvard 18, ,800 (5) 119 15, ,798 (5) 20, ,000 16,807 17, ,600 14,790 Chicago *1978 index. ■'-Salaries adjusted to correct for regional variation in the cost of living. Index is based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics budgets for a family of four in selected urban areas. High income budgets are used for tenured faculty. Intermediate income budgets are used for untenured faculty. ^Vanderbilt reported no untenured faculty. ^Chicago declined to release salary data on untenured faculty. -20- 21 (2) General Operations . Under the category of General Operations come salaries for administrative officers, clerical staff, student staff, and all expenditures for postage, telephone, and other technical necessities. (3) Student Financial Aid . One of the largest single expenditures of the Divinity School (23% of the budget) is student financial aid. Financial aid will continue to rise as costs for our students rise. Policies and procedures are described in sections on Admissions and Student Services. (4) Physical Plant s The Divinity School's physical plant consists of Gray Building (the "Old Building") and the New Building. University policy changed in the late 1960's regarding method of support for physical plant. Buildings which were part of the original University plant are cooperatively funded between the central administration and the constituent schools. New buildings are the sole responsibility of the constituent schools. In our case, we are assessed by the University for Gray Building and we pay the entire costs for the New Building. These costs for both buildings include heat and air-conditioning, water, electricity, housekeeping and all other maintenance costs. (5) Library . This category of expenditure includes salaries of professional library staff (Librarian and Reference Librarian), of library support staff, and acquisitions. Because of the Divinity School Library's relationship to Perkins Library, many technical service costs are absorbed by the Perkins system. The Divinity School Library thus maximizes Divinity School money for acquisitions (see Self-Study section on Library) . Summary The total program of the Divinity School obviously is dependent on our financial capability. The Divinity School is very fortunate. We are an integral 22 part of a University which grew out of a church-related college and is related officially to The United Methodist Church. The University is committed to the Divinity School and its well-being. On the other hand, financial pressures in the University make it plain that responsibility for the future of the Divinity School will fall to the Divinity School itself, and thus to its church constituency, especially The United Methodist Church, and to individuals, and some foundations, committed to the church and its ministry. The resources of our own endowments, of the Ministerial Education Fund, and The Duke Endowment provide a solid base, but they are not adequate for our future. We have received a great inheritance, and with it responsibility and obligation, from our past. Our former deans have worked diligently to expand endowed resources, and to improve or expand the physical facilities. Nevertheless, our financial development activities must increase. The Dean and his staff give a sizeable amount of time and effort to this task. V FACULTY The Divinity School faculty consists of twenty-nine persons. The doctorate is held by twenty-five. Two of those without a doctorate are in the process of completing a dissertation. All members of the faculty hold the M.Div. or equivalent professional degree; all but one are ordained clergy. The Divinity School Faculty (as of September 1, 1983) with the degrees held by each, with date of initial appointment and with mandatory retirement date are: Lloyd Richard Bailey, A.B., Duke University; B.D., Duke University; Ph.D., Hebrew Union College- Jewish Institute of Religion; 1971; Fall 2006. Waldo Beach, B.A., Wesleyan University; B.D., Yale University; Ph.D., Yale University; 1946; Spring 1986. Dennis M. Campbell, A.B., Duke University; B.D., Yale University; Ph.D., Duke University; 1979; Fall 2015. James Michael Efird, A.B., Davidson College; B.D., Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary; Ph.D., Duke University; 1962; Spring 2002. Richard L. Eslinger, A.B., University of Maryland; S.T.B., Boston University School of Theology; Ph.D., Boston University; 1983; Spring 2010. Donn Michael Farris, A.B., Berea College; B.D., Garrett Theological Seminary; M.S. in L.S., Columbia University; 1950; Fall 1991. Mary McClintock Fulkerson, B.M., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; M.Div., Duke University; 1983; Spring 2020. Richard Albert Goodling, A.B., Franklin and Marshall College; B.D., Lancaster Theological Seminary; Ph.D., Pennsylvania State University; 1959; Fall 1994. Robert Clark Gregg, B.A., University of the South; S.T.B., Episcopal Divinity School; Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania; 1974; Spring 2008. -23- 24 Stuart C. Henry, A.B., Davidson College; B.D., Louisville Presbyterian Seminary; Ph.D., Duke University; 1959; Fall 198A. Frederick Herzog, B.A., Bonn University; B.D., Basel University; Th.M., Princeton Theological Seminary; Th.D., Princeton Theological Seminary; 1960; Fall 1995. Osmond Kelly Ingram, A.B., Birmingham-Southern; B.D., Duke University;. 1959; Spring 1988. Creighton Lacy, A.B., Swarthmore College; B.D., Yale University; Ph.D., Yale University; 1953; Spring 1989. Thomas A. Langford, A.B., Davidson College; B.D., Duke University; Ph.D., Duke University; D.D., Davidson College; 1956; Spring 1999. Richard Lischer, B.A., Concordia Senior College; M.A. , Washington University; M.Div., Concordia Seminary; Ph.D., King's College, University of London; 1979; Fall 2013. Paul A. Mickey, B.A., Harvard College; B.D., Princeton Theological Seminary; Ph.D., Princeton Theological Seminary; 1970; Spring 2007. Roland E. Murphy, B.A., Catholic University of America; M.A., Catholic University of America; S.T.D., Catholic University of America; S.S.L., Pontifical Biblical Institute; 1971; Spring 1987. C. G. Newsome, B.A., Duke University; M.Div., Duke University; Ph.D., Duke University; 1978; Spring 2020. McMurry S. Richey, A.B., Duke University; B.D., Duke University; Ph.D., Duke University; 1954; Fall 1984. Charles K. Robinson, B.A., Arizona State University; B.D., Southern Methodist University; Ph.D., Duke University; 1961; Spring 1999. Grant S. Shockley, A.B., Lincoln University; M.Div., Drew University; M.A., Columbia University; Ed.D., Columbia University; 1983; Fall 1989. Dwight Moody Smith, Jr., A.B., Davidson College; B.D., Duke University; A.M., Yale University; Ph.D., Yale University; 1965; Fall 2001. Harmon L. Smith, B.A., Millsaps College; B.D., Duke University; Ph.D., Duke University; 1962; Spring 2000. David C. Steinmetz, B.A., Wheaton College; B.D., Drew University; Th.D., Harvard University; 1971; Spring 2006. William C. Turner, Jr., B.S., Duke University; M.Div., Duke University; 1982; Spring 2018. 25 Geoffrey Wainwright, B.A., University of Cambridge; M.A., University of Cambridge; B.D., University of Cambridge; Dr. Theol., University of Geneva; 1983; Spring 2009. John H. Westerhoff III, B.S., Ursinus College; M.Div., Harvard University; Ed.D., Teachers College, Columbia University; 1974; Spring 2003. Robert L. Wilson, A.B., Asbury College; M.A., Lehigh University; B.D., Garrett Theological Seminary; Ph.D., Northwestern University; 1970; Spring 1995. Franklin W. Young, A.B., Dartmouth College; B.D., Crozer Theological Seminary; Ph.D., Duke University; 1968; Spring 1985. Faculty members tend to remain at Duke for long periods. Through the academic year ending in the Spring of 1982, the average (mean) length of service was 18.75 years. The twenty-four faculty members had given a total of 450 years of service. Twelve had been at Duke for twenty or more years and nineteen for ten years or longer. The Divinity School is facing the retirement of some of its most prominent faculty members. Seven persons will retire in this decade and four more by 1995. Thus eleven members of the faculty are scheduled to retire in the next twelve years. Areas covered by faculty due to retire between now and 1990 include American Christianity, Theology and Christian Nurture, New Testament, Christian Ethics, Old Testament, Parish Ministry and World Christianity. The Divinity School has traditionally had, and continues to have, an ecumenical faculty. The present full-time faculty includes men and women who hold ministerial orders in nine denominations including: United Methodist (14), Episcopal (4), Presbyterian (4), United Church of Christ (2), The British Methodist Church (1), Lutheran CI), Missionary Baptist (1), Roman Catholic (1), United Holy Church of America (1). Four persons are affiliated with the Divinity School as related faculty members. These include Albert F. Fisher, Director of the Office of Rural 26 Church Affairs of The Duke Endowment, who Is Adjunct Professor of Parish Work, P. Wesley Aitken, John C. Detwiler and Peter G. Keese who are members of the chaplain staff of the Duke University Medical Center, and who serve as Associates in Instruction. The Divinity School expects the members of the faculty to be competent in three areas: teaching, research and writing, and service to the University and church. Persons being considered for faculty positions are judged as to their potential in these areas. Faculty being considered for tenure or promotion are reviewed regarding their performance in all three areas. While individual skills and interests vary, a significant contribution in all three is expected from each individual. Duke University encourages its faculty to continue to develop. One method is through a sabbatical policy which every seven years relieves the faculty member of all responsibilities for one semester at full salary or two semesters at one-half salary. The person who elects the one semester sabbatical is relieved of committee responsibilities for the entire academic year. Faculty members are also free from classroom responsibilities during the summer which permits three months for research and writing. VI LIBRARY Any consideration of the Divinity School Library must initially recognize that it is probably more intimately a part of a major general research library than is any other seminary library in the ATS. It is physically separate from the general library of the University, the William R. Perkins Library, but it stands next to that library and is internally connected to it. The Divinity School Library determines its own collection development policies, handles its own circulation processes, and provides its own reference service. All of the technical services, however, which are necessary to its operation — from the placing of orders to the cataloging and physical preparation of the books coming to its collection — are carried out by centralized departments in the Perkins Library. Furthermore, all of the microforms, manuscripts, and rare books purchased by the Divinity School Library are housed and serviced by the appropriate departments in the Perkins Library. In addition to using the departments of the Perkins Library just referred to. Divinity School students also use the Reference, Documents, Circulation, Inter- library Loan, Photographic Services, Periodicals and Bibliography Departments in that library. The Librarian of the Divinity School is a full, voting member of the Divinity School faculty with the rank of Professor. As such, his primary reporting responsibility is to the Dean of the Divinity School. In view, however, of the multitude of services which the Perkins Library performs for -27- 28 the Divinity School Library, the number of Divinity School students who use the Perkins Library, and the fact that the Divinity School Library provides its services to all members of the University coiranunity who need to use its collection, it is appropriate and necessary that the Librarian of the Divinity School maintain a close reporting and cooperative relationship with the Librarian of the University. The Divinity School Librarian also maintains a close working relationship with the Assistant University Librarians for Collection Development, Administrative Services, Technical Services, and Public Services, each of whom is concerned with certain aspects of Divinity School Library operations. The Divinity School Librarian is responsible on the one hand for maintaining the integrity and individuality of the Divinity School Library within the extensive twelve-unit library system of which it is a part, and on the other hand for functioning in such a way as to make the resources of the other units in the system maximally useful to the Divinity School community and the resources of the Divinity School Library maximally useful to the University community at large. That the Divinity School Library is "a primary information resource for educational and research programs of the institution" is ensured chiefly by its membership in the research-oriented University Library system in which its position has just been explained, and by the presence of its Librarian who has served in his position for more than thirty-two years and who has supervised the acquisition of more than three-quarters of its 215,000 volume collection. Stated in its broadest terms, the acquisitions philosophy of the Divinity School Library is to secure in research depth, and in all languages used by its clientele, all significant materials needed to support the curricular offerings of the Divinity School and the Department of Religion at both the undergraduate 29 and graduate levels, and to support the research programs — current and anticipated — of the faculty of both these divisions and of the doctoral candidates in the field of religion. Library policy is determined by the Librarian after consultation, as necessary, with the remainder of the library staff, the Dean of the Divinity School, the faculty, and the appropriate members of the administrative staff in the Perkins Library. As was indicated earlier, the Librarian of the Divinity School is a full, voting member of the Divinity School faculty with the rank of Professor. He participates in faculty meetings and, at the discretion of the Dean, serves on faculty committees. He reports to the assembled faculty on library matters of general interest, but his consultation with the faculty is more likely to be on a one-to-one basis rather than with the entire group. The William R. Perkins Library — and with it the Divinity School Library — have moved more deliberately into the "communications revolution" than have some libraries. The hope has been that reasonable caution at the outset would allow us to avoid serious miscalculations in the initial moves which might require expensive changes of direction or alterations of policy at a later time. Progress now, however, is strong and steady. All acquisitions records are accessed by computer. The Perkins Library is a member of SOLINET and through this membership is linked to OCLC. It is anticipated that the public catalog will be on-line within the next five years. Flans are underway for the storage of all Duke's acquisitions, holdings, and circulation information in a single unified data base which will, of course, be open to and used by the Divinity School Library. The Divinity School Library, in October 1982, acquired a Vector A Microcomputer which makes it possible for the Library to access Duke's Technical Services 30 Data Base, the OCLC Data Base, and the various conmiercially available data bases. The Vector 4 also has the capacity for word processing and the storage of programs which may either be purchased or prepared locally for the specific needs of the Divinity School Library. The determination of the adequacy of the Library's holdings for the support of the programs of the School is an integral part of the collection development program which is the major responsibility of the Librarian. The entire collection is always under study with an eye to keeping its strengths balanced; and its various segments come under repeated scrutiny with an eye to keeping them strong, up to date, and supportive of changing emphases in the curriculum and changing interests among students and faculty. In this continuing study, the Librarian is aided by the Reference Librarian and the Circulation Librarians (who have daily experience with the needs and requests of the library patrons) , by one-to-one consultations with faculty and students (particularly students in the doctoral program), and by consultation with the Collection Development staff of the Perkins Library (who manifest a keen interest in how the Divinity School collection supports the University's general collection and how the general collection supports the Divinity School collection). The Divinity School Library operates almost entirely on the basis of one-to-one consultations between staff members and patrons in the provision of bibliographic instruction, in introducing patrons to the resources of the Library, and in giving instruction in research methods and the use of the Library. Both the Librarian and the Reference Librarian have graduate theological degrees as well as degrees in library administration, both members of the circulation staff hold graduate degrees (one in theology), and the 31 fifth member of the staff (who is responsible for the maintenance of the public catalog) has her undergraduate degree in philosophy and religion. Consequently, all members of the staff have some degree of competence in aiding patrons in the finding and use of library materials; and all of them generally are available to give reference service as it is needed by library patrons. Library Renovations The Divinity School Library is in need of some physical renovation. In the past year, the Dean and the Librarian, working with the Library Committee and the University Architect's Office, developed plans for major refurbishing and significant improvements in the Library. Funds were secured and contracts are now being finalized for a $90,000 project to be completed in May, 198A. The project includes: — a 3-M Security System — a custom-designed and custom-built circulation desk with computer facilities for library circulation — new lighting in the Reference Room and the Periodical Room — a new ceiling in the Reference Room — new carpeting throughout the Library Circulation and Card Catalog areas — painting the entire Library — a new door for the main entrance to the Library. The Divinity School Library is now the third largest collection in the Duke University Library system. H kO ^* f*^ sD CN -cf rO r«- O u-v '.'N CT> — < m m — ' CTN — < ON CO OvI — < "-I O ►J < 0) H C O 3 ■ — 1 Lr> C ^1 o — — < + + 1 + 1 n o o o ►J w < w < O or J a 3: a H Z -' < 3 C ec C CM CM O 00 f- tlj ^ WO'-' 2 C 00 < ON 00 . . cc CO O —1 CM CJN oc >ri in m — . >j o — I ri — ( 00 00 r-x m c fsl O CM CM > C tJC c o -. c s H ^ 01 PC c u H t-! • V M 3 T3 C- 3 ta 0) 3 u: ,J :^ U. O »^ E s: 73 >a tfl , U U CO to 01 u u w J3 ^ • ft -H > J .J (U